ERIC EJ1099626: Does Problem-Based Learning Improve Problem Solving Skills?--A Study among Business Undergraduates at Malaysian Premier Technical University

2016·0.16 MB·English

by  ERIC

International Education Studies; Vol. 9, No. 5; 2016
ISSN 1913-9020 E-ISSN 1913-9039
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
Does Problem-Based Learning Improve Problem Solving Skills?—A
Study among Business Undergraduates at Malaysian Premier Technical
University
Z. Abdul Kadir1, N. H. Abdullah2, E. Anthony1, B. Mohd Salleh1 & R. Kamarulzaman1
1 Department of English Language & Linguistics, Centre for Language Studies, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn
Malaysia, Malaysia
2 Faculty of Technology Management, Business and Entrepreneurship, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia,
Malaysia
Correspondence: Z. Abdul Kadir, Department of English Language & Linguistics, Centre for Language Studies,
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Malaysia. Tel: [phone]. E-mail: [email protected]

Received: October 9, 2015 Accepted: November 24, 2015 Online Published: April 26, 2016
doi:10.5539/ies.v9n5p166 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n5p166

Abstract
Problem-based Learning (PBL) approach has been widely used in various disciplines since it is claimed to
improve students’ soft skills. However, empirical supports on the effect of PBL on problem solving skills have
been lacking and anecdotal in nature. This study aimed to determine the effect of PBL approach on students’
problem solving skills using a quasi-experimental non-equivalent group pretest–posttest design. Fifty
management students from a premier Technical University in Malaysia were assigned to experimental and
control groups. In the experimental group, students were given four problems to be solved and their solutions of
the problems given were assessed in terms of their accuracy and quality. Students in the control group received
conventional classroom instructional design. Results indicate that students in the experimental group have better
problem solving skills (z: -4.220, p: 0.001 for accuracy and z: -2.594, p: 0.009 for quality) compared to those
who were not exposed to the PBL approach. This finding substantiates the use of PBL as an effective
instructional tool to improve students’ problem solving abilities.
Keywords: problem solving skills, problem-based learning
1. Introduction
A survey conducted by ManpowerGroup (2012) found that many employers are not satisfied with their current
employees’ problem-solving skills. Similarly, fifty-five percent of employers participated in the survey by Grant
Thornton LLP (AccountingWeb, 2010) claimed that recruiting accounting executives with necessary soft skills
such as communication, critical thinking, and problem solving abilities poses the most significant challenge. The
centrality of problem-solving skill is accentuated when it is found to enhance creativity, enjoyment, interest and
learning (Yu et al., 2010). This issue has led to further scrutiny on instructional delivery at tertiary education
level which mostly uses conventional classroom approach. A meta-analyses comparing PBL to conventional
classrooms indicate that PBL approach is superior in terms of long-term retention, skill development and
students satisfaction (Strobel & Barneveld, 2009) while Yadav et al. (2011) found that PBL leads to higher
problem-solving skills and increase students’ factual knowledge (Yadav et al., 2011). Moreover, various studies
in diverse disciplines such as Mathematics (Rohani & Sahar, 2012), Communication (Chapman, 2002), Medical
(Nan, 2011), and Social Sciences (Nair & Alkiyumi, 2011) have shown that PBL have positive effects on
students in building up their problem solving skills, critical and creative thinking skills, cooperative and
communication skills, and adaptability (Albanese & Mitchell, 1993; Hmelo-Silver, 1998; Koray et al., 2008; and
Nur Izzati et al., 2010). However, most of these studies are cross sectional in nature which leads to heated
debates on its effectiveness. Anecdotal evidence in forms of inconsistent and contradicting findings also
indicates the need to further investigate the effectiveness of PBL on problem solving skills.
Thus, the main purpose of this study is to identify whether the students exposed to PBL treatments improve their
problem solving skills. All students in PBL and control groups were given similar test at the beginning of the
semester to establish the baseline score. The PBL group experienced the treatments while the control group was
166
www.ccsenet.org/ies International Education Studies Vol. 9, No. 5; 2016
having non-PBL approach in their learning process. At the end of the semester, another test was administered to
all the students in both groups to gauge their problem solving skills.
2. Method
2.1 Design
This was a quasi-experimental study with a non-equivalent control group, using pre and post analysis on
measuring students’ problem solving skills in PBL learning environment and non-PBL learning environment.
This design is appropriate for groups that are naturally assembled, such as intact classrooms (Campbell &
Stanley, 1963). The design included the pre-test and post- test for both groups. The effect of instructional
approach of learning (PBL) on students’ problem solving skills was measured in terms of the quality and
accuracy of solutions provided by the students.
2.2 Sample
Both experimental and control groups had 25 participants in each group. All of these participants were first year
undergraduate management students at Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, enrolling in “Effective
Communication” subject. The study was conducted for 14 weeks or one semester. Prior to exposure, all
participants were given a test measuring their problem solving skills based on accuracy and quality of solutions.
Later on, participants from PBL group were exposed to the PBL approach such as how to deal with the problems,
preparing the “FILA” table–a four-column table (Facts, Ideas, Learning Issues, Action), and how to organize the
information in solving the problems. Similar test was given at the end of the semester to all participants in both
groups. Marks for pre and post measures tests were compared in indentifying whether PBL helps students in
fostering students’ problem solving skills.
2.3 Instruments
The tests were prepared by the researchers and were verified by experts in content area, teaching and learning
and PBL. The experts evaluated the content of the tests based on literature on crafting a good trigger, especially
characteristics highlighted by Tan (2007). In getting the scores, the students’ answers were given to two raters.
They assessed the students’ work on the accuracy and quality of the solutions. The accuracy and quality of the
solutions were evaluated using the rubric provided by the researcher. The rubric was the modified version of the
standardized MUET band description used in MUET examination. The scores were recorded and the data were
analysed using Mann-Whitney U test. This test was selected in comparing the samples’ performances in
assessing whether there is any significance difference in students’ problem solving skills from these two different
groups at the beginning and at the end of the course. Furthermore, the number of respondent is 25 for each
experimental and control groups, thus it can be concluded that this test is the most appropriate test to be used.
Two facilitators gave their ratings on the students’ work. Marks were given and the average marks were recorded.
Inter-raters of this study were chosen based on several criteria. They were experts in the course, shared the same
interest, and had been teaching the same subject for several semesters. Initially three lecturers were chosen and
they were given 10 scripts of the students’ work to be assessed. Based on the inter-rater agreement (kappa) result,
two lecturers were chosen to be the inter-raters of this study.

Table 1. Inter-rater agreement (Kappa)
Kappa value p
IR 1 and IR 2 0.375 0.03
IR 1 and IR 3 0.035 0.775
IR 2 and IR 3 0.205 0.159

Kappa for the agreement between the ratings of inter-rater 1 and inter-rater 2 was 0.375 with p = 0.03. However,
the agreement between the ratings of inter-rater 1 and inter-rater 3, followed by inter-rater 2 and inter-rater 3,
were not significant with p-values 0.775 and 0.159, respectively. Therefore, inter-rater 1 and inter-rater 2 were
chosen to assess the students’ problem solving skills.
2.4 Data Collection and Procedure
At the beginning of the semester, the pre-test picture was conducted at the same time among the two classes
identified. The subjects were given a problem in the form of a picture to measure their ability in solving the
167
www.ccsenet.org/ies International Education Studies Vol. 9, No. 5; 2016
problem. The picture portrayed a clogged drain. 15 minutes were allocated for them to give solutions for the
problem given. The test was conducted at the same time for PBL and non-PBL classes.
A post-test picture was conducted at the end of the semester, after the subjects were exposed to PBL treatments.
The post-test was a picture, which was similar to the one given at the beginning of the semester. The PBL and
non-PBL classes sat for the test at the same time. The reason for having the post-test was to see if there was any
difference in their problem solving skills before and after the exposure of the treatments.
The scores on problem solving skills were processed using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). All
hypotheses were tested using non-parametric of Mann-Whitney U test. The non-parametric tests were conducted
because the number of respondent was small (N = 25 for each PBL and non-PBL class). According to Siegel
(1956), if the sample sizes are small, as small as N=6, non-parametric tests should be used unless the nature of
the population distribution is known exactly. In addition, the adequate sample size for parametric tests is N>30
(Tomkins, 2006). Non-parametric tests are also available for all common experimental designs (Siegel, 1956). In
addition, non-parametric tests are suitable for treating samples made up of observations from several different
populations (Siegel & Castellan, 1988).
3. Results
The objective of this study was to determine if there was any difference in students’ problem solving skills at the
beginning and at the end of the semester after attending PBL treatments.

Table 2. Participants’ demographic background (n=50)
Characteristics PBL (n=25) Non-PBL (n=25)
Gender:
Male 10 (20%) 11 (22%)
Female 15 (30%) 14 (28%)
z: -.284, p = 0.777
Age:
20 4 6
21 18 12
22 3 7
z: -1.409, p = 0.159
Race:
Malay 9 (18%) 11 (22%)
Chinese 13 (26%) 10 (20%)
Indian 2 (4%) 1 (2%)
Others 1 (2%) 3 (6%)
z: -.244, p = 0.807

168
www.ccsenet.org/ies International Education Studies Vol. 9, No. 5; 2016
Table 3. Pre and post measures on students’ problem solving skills between PBL and non-PBL (n=50)
Non-PBL (n=25) PBL (n=25)
Mean rank (accuracy post) 15.50 35.50
Mean rank (quality post) 20.88 30.12
Mann-Whitney U (accuracy) 62.50
(quality) 197.00
z (accuracy) -4.96
z (quality) -2.913
p (accuracy) 0.001
p (quality) 0.004

Table 1 displays the mean ranks of accuracy and quality on problem solving skills between PBL and non-PBL
groups. It can be seen that there was a significant difference on the mean ranks between PBL and non-PBL in
terms of accuracy and quality of the solution. For the PBL group, the mean rank was 35.50 compared to
non-PBL group, 15.50. These results support the contention that there was improvement on problem solving
skills in terms of accuracy after the students attended PBL treatments.
From the aspect of quality, the mean rank value presented was 30.12 for PBL group and for the non-PBL group,
the value was 20.88. Thus, it can be concluded that students in PBL group had better quality in their solutions of
the problems.
Furthermore, the z value displayed was -4.96 for accuracy and -2.913 for quality. The p values for accuracy and
quality were 0.001 and 0.004 respectively (p<0.05). Therefore, the Mann-Whitney U test of the experiment and
control groups revealed that there was a statistically significant difference between these two groups on the
accuracy and quality with respect to problem solving skills after the treatments.
The finding of this study was consistent with the studies done by Hmelo-Silver (1998), Koray et al. (2008), Neo
and Neo (2005), and Nur Izzati et al. (2010) despite the different types of measurements used. This indicates the
suitability of PBL approach to be used in various disciplines.
4. Discussion
This study adds to existing literatures on the benefits of PBL approach compared to the traditional classroom
approach. The problem-solving process, which is central within a PBL environment, was guided by a framework
where students learn to explore and analyse problems systematically (Dochy et al., 2005). This enables students
to be proactive and expand their existing knowledge bases. Students also use various sources of information
from their textbooks and others in informal discussions with peers (Major & Palmer, 2001) which enable them to
integrate knowledge across disciplines and approaches. Other than that, PBL provides channels for students to
experience authentic problems (Savery & Duffy, 1995). By having authentic problems to be solved, students are
more involved in the learning process. Therefore, students are usually more innovative and creative in their
problem solving approach. In contrast, in a non-PBL approach of learning, students tend to have the knowledge
rather than to create the knowledge and emphasis is on the broad coverage of content areas through lectures
(Beachey, 2007). Traditional learning leads students to be passive in class, to memorize, repeat, and rely on notes
given by the lecturers.
When students are given a trigger by the lecturer (known as facilitator), they need to discuss and find solutions
for the trigger. In the process of finding the solutions, they go through the process of information gathering (such
as doing library research and search information from the Internet), conduct meetings, interact with people, and
prepare the presentation (O’Grady & Alwis, 2002). Therefore, with enough information and ideas being
discussed, the possibility to reach accurate and with quality solutions are there (Jonassen, 1997).
5. Recommendations
Future research might need to focus on the implementation of PBL at different levels of students, such as
primary school, secondary school and part-time students. In addition, a larger sample should be considered and
the assessments should be done not only for one semester but it could be throughout the whole course. This study,
however, has several limitations inherent to quasi experimental research design. The findings of the research
cannot be generalized to other settings, since it was employed with small samples of students at a premier
169
www.ccsenet.org/ies International Education Studies Vol. 9, No. 5; 2016
Malaysian Technical University for only one semester. Furthermore, this study measured problem solving using
two dimensions only, namely accuracy and quality. Thus, future research might include more comprehensive
conceptualization and measurement of problem solving.
References
AccountingWeb. (2010). Finance execs: Many candidates lack critical thinking, problem solving abilities.
Albanese, M. A., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A Review of Literature on Its Outcomes and
Implementation Issues. Academic Medicine, 68, 52-81.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199301000-00012.
Anthony, E. M., & Zulida, A. K. (2012). A road not taken: A breakthrough in english for specific purposes via
problem-based learning. Journal of Technical Education and Training (JTET), 4(1), 51-71.
Barrows, H. S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical Education, 20, 481-486.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1986.tb01386.x.
Barrows, H. S., & Wee, K. N. L. (2007). Principles and Practice of a PBL. Singapore: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Beachey, W. D. (2007). A comparison of problem-based learning and traditional curricula in Baccalaureate
respiratory therapy education. Respiratory Care, 52(11), 1497-1506
Belland, B. R., French, B. F., & Ertmer, P. A. (2009). Validity and Problem-based Learning Research: A Review
of Instruments Used to Assess Intended Learning Outcomes. The Interdisciplinary Journal of
Problem-based Learning, 3(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1059
Bernama. (2010). 5 reasons why Malaysian graduates are unemployed. Retrieved from
http://tlc-kdu.blogspot.com/2010/02/5-reasons-why-malaysian-graduates-are.html
Bigelow, J. D. (2004). Using problem-based learning to develop skills in solving unstructured problems. Journal
of Management Education, 28(5), 591-609. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1052562903257310
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago:
Rand McNally & Company.
Chapman, D. W. (2002). Words That Make a Difference: Problem-based Learning in Communication Arts
Courses. The Journal of General Education, 51(4). http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jge.2003.0009
Ersoy, E., & Baser, H. (2014). The Effects of Problem-based Learning Method in Higher Education on Creative
Thinking. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Science, 116, 3494-3498.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.790
Ferreira, M. M., & Trudel, A. R. (2012). The Impact of Problem Based Learning (PBL) on Student Attitudes
toward Science, Problem-Solving Skills, and Sense of Community in the Classroom. Journal of Classroom
Interaction, 47(1), 23-30.
Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., Bossche, P. V., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis
from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational Research, 75(1), 27-51.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543075001027
Goodnough, K. C., & Woei, H. (2008). Engaging Teacher’s Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Adopting a
Nine-Step of Problem-Based Learning Model. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning,
12(2).
Heppner, P. P., & Baker, C. E. (1997). Application of problem solving inventory. Measurement & Evaluation in
Counseling & Development (American Counseling Association), 29(4), 229-242.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (1998). Cognitive consequences of problem-based learning for the early development of
medical expertise. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 10(2), 92-100.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15328015TLM1002_7
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology
Review, 16(3), 235-266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional Design Models for Well-Structured and Ill-Structured Problem-Solving
Learning Outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 65-94.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02299613
Kelson, A. C. M. (2000). Assessment of students for proactive lifelong learning. In D. H. Evensen, &
170
www.ccsenet.org/ies International Education Studies Vol. 9, No. 5; 2016
Hmelo-Silver, C. (Eds.), Problem-based learning: A research perspectives on learning interactions (pp.
315-345). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Khairiyah, M. Y., Zaidatun, T., Syed, A. H., & Jamalludin, H. (2005). Promoting problem-based learning in
engineering courses at the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Global Journal of Engineering Education, 9(2),
175-184.
Klegeris, A., & Hurren, H. (2011). Problem-based learning in a large classroom setting: methodology, student
perception, and problem solving skills. Proceedings of EDULEARN 11 Conference. Barcelona, Spain.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/advan.00046.2011
Koray, O., Presley, A., Koskal, M. S., & Ozdemir, M. (2008). Enhancing Problem Solving Skills of Pre-service
Elementary School Teachers through Problem Based Learning. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science and
Teaching, 9(2), 1.
Lee, M., & Kim, D. S. (2005). The effects of the collaborative representation supporting tool on problem-solving
processes and outcomes in web-based collaborative problem-based learning (PBL) environments. Journal
of Interactive Learning Research, 16(3), 273-293.
Loyens, S. M. M, Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Schmidt, H. G. (2006). Students’ conceptions of constructivist learning:
A comparison between a traditional and a PBL curriculum. Advances in Health Science Education, 11,
365-379. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10459-006-9015-5
Loyens, S. M. M., Magda, J., & Rikers, R. M. J. P. (2008). Self-directed learning in problem-based learning and
its relationships with self-regulated learning. Education Psychology Review, 20, 411-427.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9082-7
ManpowerGroup. (2012). 2012 Talent Shortage Survey. Retrieved June 4, 2013, from
http://www.manpowergroup.us/campaigns/talent-shortage-2012/pdf/2012_Talent_Shortage_Survey_Results
_US_FINALFINAL.pdf
Mohd, N. I., Nor, A. N. & Irfan, N. U. (2010). The effects of mind mapping with cooperative learning on
programming performance, problem solving skills and metacognitive knowledge among computer science
students. J. Educational Computing Research, 42(1), 35-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/EC.42.1.b
Morreale, S. P., Spitzberg, B. H., & Barge, J. K. (2001). Human Communication: Motivation, Knowledge, and
Skills. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Nair, S., & Alkiyumi, M. T. (2011). Investigation the relationship between intrinsic motivation and creative
production on solving real problems. Journal Sosiohumanika, 4(2).
Nan, O. (2011). Perception of first and second year medical students on problem-based learning in Universiti
Malaysia Sarawak. World Applied Sciences Journal, 14(11), 1628-1634.
Neo, M., & Neo, T. (2005). A multimedia-enhanced problem-based learning experience in the Malaysian
classroom. Learning, Media and Technology, 30(1), 41-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13581650500075553
Nur Izzati, A., Rohani. A. T., & Rosini, A. (2010). The Effect of Problem based Learning on Mathematics
Performance and Affective Attributes in Learning Statistics at Form Four Secondary Level. Procedia Social
and Behavioural Sciences, 8, 370-376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.052.
O’Bannon, F., & McFaden, C. (2008). Model of experiential andragogy: Development of a non-traditional
experiential learning program model. Journal of Unconventional Parks, Tourism & Recreation Research,
1(1), 23-28.
O’Grady, G., & Alwis, W. A. M. (2002). One-Day, One-Problem: PBL at Republic Polytechnics. Paper presented
at 4th Asia Pacific Conference on PBL, Thailand.
Pease, M. A., & Kuhn, D. (2011). Experimental analysis of the effective components of problem-based learning.
Science Education, 95(1), 57-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.20412
Recker, M. (2010). Learning and communication theories in instructional technology. Retrieved from
http://itls.usu.edu/~mimi/courses/6260/construct.html
Rohani, A. T., & Sahar, B. (2012). Collaborative problem-based learning in mathematics: A cognitive load
perspective. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences, 32, 344-350.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.01.051
Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist
171
www.ccsenet.org/ies International Education Studies Vol. 9, No. 5; 2016
framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31-38.
Savin-Baden, M., & Major, C. H. (2004). Foundations of problem-based learning. Maidenhead: The Society for
Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
Schecter, C. (2011). Switching cognitive gears: Problem-based learning and success-based learning as
instructional frameworks in leadership education. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 143-165.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09578231111116707
Selcuk, G. S., & Caliskan, S. (2010). A Small-scale Study Comparing the Impacts of Problem-based Learning
and Traditional Methods on Student Satisfaction in the Introductory Physics Course. Procedia Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 2, 809-813. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.108
Senocak, E. (2009). Development of an instrument for assessing undergraduate science students’ perceptions:
The problem-based learning environment inventory. J. Science Education Technology, 18, 560-569.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9173-3
Shaizatul, A. R., & Maisarah, M. S. (2015). The Perception of Critical Thinking and Problem Solving Skill
among Malaysian Undergraduate Students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 725-732.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.425
Siegel, S. (1956). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company,
Inc.
Siegel, S. (1957). Nonparametric statistics. The American Statistician, 11(3), 13-19.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1957.10501091
Siegel, S., & Castellan, N. J. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Sinprakob, S., & Songkram, N. (2015). A Proposed Model of Problem-based Learning on Social Media in
Cooperation with Searching Technique to Enhance Critical Thinking of Undergraduate Students.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Science, 174, 2027-2030. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.871
Strobel, J., & van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL More Effective ? A Meta-synthesis of Meta-analyses
Comparing PBL to Conventional Classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3(4),
44-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1046
Subadrah, N., & Mohammed, T. A. (2011). Investigation the relationship between intrinsic motivation and
creative production on solving real problems. SOSIOHUMANIKA, 4(2), 185-196.
Tan, O. S. (2007). Problem-based Learning in eLearning Breakthroughs. Singapore: Thomson Learning.
Tomkins, C. C. (2006). An introduction to non-parametric statistic for health scientists. University of Alberta
Health Sciences Journal, 3(1), 20-26.
Wijnia, L., Loyens, S. M. M., & Derous, E. (2010). Investigating effects of problem-based versus lecture-based
learning environments on student motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(2), 101-113.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.11.003
Wijnia, L., Loyens, S. M. M., Gog, T. V., Derous, E., & Schmidt, H. G. (2014). Is there a role for direct
instruction in problem-based learning? Comparing student-constructed versus integrated model answers.
Learning and Instruction, 34, 22-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.07.006
Yadav, A., Subedi, D., Lundeberg, M. A., & Bunting, C. F. (2011). Problem-based learning: Influence in
students’ learning in an electrical engineering course. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(2), 253-280.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00013.x
Yu, W. F., She, H. C., & Lee, Y. M. (2010). The Effects of Web-based/non-web-based Problem Solving
Instruction and High/Low Achievement on Students’ Problem Solving Ability and Biology Achievement.
Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47(2), 187-199.

Copyrights
Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to the journal.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
172